Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Alabama Supreme Court decision is one of the morally clearest rulings of the decade
The Gospel Coalition ^ | Feb 2024 | Joe Carter

Posted on 02/28/2024 8:36:01 AM PST by CondoleezzaProtege

The Alabama Supreme Court decision is one of the morally clearest rulings of the decade. As it rightly asserts, unborn children are “children” and deserve appropriate legal and ethical protections. Unfortunately, many Christians—including those who consider themselves “pro-life”—are lacking in similar moral clarity.

…In December 2020, a patient at an Alabama hospital wandered into the fertility clinic through an unsecured doorway. The patient then entered the cryogenic nursery and removed several embryos. As the court notes, “The subzero temperatures at which the embryos had been stored freeze-burned the patient’s hand, causing the patient to drop the embryos on the floor, killing them.”

Several parents of these embryos sued the clinic under Alabama’s Wrongful Death of a Minor Act, a statute that allows parents of a deceased child to recover punitive damages for their child’s death.

…In summary, the theologically based view of the sanctity of life adopted by the People of Alabama encompasses the following: (1) God made every person in His image; (2) each person therefore has a value that far exceeds the ability of human beings to calculate; and (3) human life cannot be wrongfully destroyed without incurring the wrath of a holy God, who views the destruction of His image as an affront to Himself. Section 36.06 recognizes that this is true of unborn human life no less than it is of all other human life—that even before birth, all human beings bear the image of God, and their lives cannot be destroyed without effacing his glory.

(Excerpt) Read more at thegospelcoalition.org ...


TOPICS: Reference; Religion; Science
KEYWORDS: ivf; prolife; scotus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021 last
To: edwinland

“ SO I ask a question: do you think the Federal Government has jurisdiction in ordinary cases of murder or not?.”

_____________

It depends. Does a federal government have a duty to defend the people who are otherwise defenseless? I believe they do.

And if the states enact laws where defenseless people are being deliberately targeted for killing, then the federal government should do something about that.

Whether it is abortion, euthanasia, assisted suicide, infanticide or biological culling. These people are all, in truth, persons under our constitution. Regardless of whether the corrupt Supreme Court has recognized their personhood, all people know these are persons…especially the Catholic justices of whom not one has been able to find personhood for the unborn and who refuse to stop assisted suicide. It’s scandalous, to say the least. It is demonic.


21 posted on 03/02/2024 9:49:58 AM PST by jacknhoo (Luke 12:51; Think ye, that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, no; but separation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson